Stupid Canadian Cops Busted Trying To Incite Protest Riot

[Agathon]

Originally posted by Flubber


Why?

Because they're sacks of crap, that's why.

[Kidlicious]

Flubber,

Your problem is that you use "might" where "probably" and "probably not" belongs. Or maybe you can't tell.

You have a problem reasoning. Admit it to yourself.

[Flubber]

Originally posted by Tingkai


They do take hostile action. You can see the masked cops hitting Cole and the other union guys three or four times. At one point, the one cop takes a couple of step towards Cole and hits him with a shove, obviously trying to start fight.

Time index and link to the video you are referring to please. Cause the one I saw and watched a few times (linked in the OP) shows the police guy giving one shove-- I thought the police were remarkeably restrained considering how many times the old guy grabbed at their face coverings

[Flubber]

Originally posted by Kidicious
Flubber,

Your problem is that you use "might" where "probably" and "probably not" belongs. Or maybe you can't tell.

You have a problem reasoning. Admit it to yourself.

Interesting -- since in two different jobs my "superior analytical skills" have been cited and I make a great living "reasoning" all day long. Ahh buit I guess I should take the word of an internet commie that I have never met.

OH and I don't know what you are getting at with the "might"

Dictionary.com discusses "might" as follows

Used to indicate a possibility or probability that is weaker than may: We might discover a pot of gold at the end of the rainbow.

Used to express possibility or probability or permission in the past: She told him yesterday he might not go on the trip.


I don't think anyone could misunderstand what I have been saying if they read even moderately carefully so I don't know what you are trying to say. Since "might' is used to express a "possibility" or "probability" in the past.

But I ain't no grammar whiz so I'll accept that there might be a better word to use

[Flubber]

Originally posted by Agathon


Because they're sacks of crap, that's why.

Hmmm -is that your opinion of EVERY individual that happens to be a policeman??

What if I think you are a worthless sack of crap? Am I then justified to get a group together to beat you within an inch of your life??

[Agathon]

Originally posted by Flubber


Time index and link to the video you are referring to please. Cause the one I saw and watched a few times (linked in the OP) shows the police guy giving one shove-- I thought the police were remarkeably restrained considering how many times the old guy grabbed at their face coverings

This has long since evolved past the video. There is testimony from various sources now.

Again, I invite you to explain why we should doubt the word of people who have so far not been caught in a lie, against the word of a police force that has been caught in two lies already.

These guys went to stir up trouble at the Bloc end of the protest. They got outed after trying to encourage other protesters to be aggressive, and they made their way back through the other protest, where they acted like douchebags once more, and perhaps attempted to encourage the blockers there to riot.

It's the simplest explanation, and is in character for the Canadian police when it comes to issues like this.

[Flubber]

Originally posted by Agathon


This has long since evolved past the video. There is testimony from various sources now.

Irrelevent when he says "you can see . . ." . This to me means that I can actually see this police violence so I want the video in which I can see it.

Otherwise he should just say that "various sources have reported" or something. But when someone says

They do take hostile action. You can see the masked cops hitting Cole and the other union guys three or four times.

I think it should be visible.

[Agathon]

Originally posted by Flubber


Irrelevent when he says "you can see . . ." . This to me means that I can actually see this police violence so I want the video in which I can see it.

Otherwise he should just say that "various sources have reported" or something. But when someone says

I think it should be visible.

You obviously don't want to admit that the pigs can be anything other than virtuous public servants.

[Flubber]

Originally posted by Agathon


This has long since evolved past the video. There is testimony from various sources now.

Again, I invite you to explain why we should doubt the word of people who have so far not been caught in a lie, against the word of a police force that has been caught in two lies already.

These guys went to stir up trouble at the Bloc end of the protest. They got outed after trying to encourage other protesters to be aggressive, and they made their way back through the other protest, where they acted like douchebags once more, and perhaps attempted to encourage the blockers there to riot.

It's the simplest explanation, and is in character for the Canadian police when it comes to issues like this.

Can you cite the "testimony" sources. All I have seen so far is some stuff citing "protesters" or "blockers" and it was all pretty general stuff. I would be most interested inany available testimony.

Originally posted by Agathon

Again, I invite you to explain why we should doubt the word of people who have so far not been caught in a lie, against the word of a police force that has been caught in two lies already.

Since other than one excited guy on the video I haven't heard from a single individual. Oh and what are the two lies-- I know the "they were not police" one but whats the other? Is it anything that is independently verifiable other than from the statements of Blockers/protesters. Before I like to proclaim a statement to be absolutely a lie, I like to have more than vague statements.

For instance, if the supposed police lie is that they got the rock from the Blocker . .. that is arguably true even if the main group identified them as police. I never heard a chronology of whether it was obtained before, after or during the encounter with the first group . Its possible both groups are telling the truth since I have not heard anything that make those points mutually exclusive

Originally posted by Agathon


These guys went to stir up trouble at the Bloc end of the protest. They got outed after trying to encourage other protesters to be aggressive, and they made their way back through the other protest, where they acted like douchebags once more, and perhaps attempted to encourage the blockers there to riot.

All assumptions. If you have more statements by blockers/ other protesters, I would love to read them. Since the video alone doesn't show any of what you say

Originally posted by Agathon



It's the simplest explanation, and is in character for the Canadian police when it comes to issues like this.

I know you like to cite the simple explanation but do you know how frequently the simplest explanation is dead wrong? Even if its right the majority of times, thats no reason to jump to conclusions when more eveidence may come to light.

For now, I continue to keep an open mind until I have an opportunity to review this evidence that you indicate exists

[Flubber]

Originally posted by Agathon


You obviously don't want to admit that the pigs can be anything other than virtuous public servants.

Nope not true-- I know a few *******s that became police and I know a few really great people. As for the rest, I give them the benefit of the doubt.

You attitude is obvious and totally stereotypical

[Agathon]

Originally posted by Flubber

Can you cite the "testimony" sources. All I have seen so far is some stuff citing "protesters" or "blockers" and it was all pretty general stuff. I would be most interested inany available testimony.

I linked to one guy earlier in the thread. There's a bunch of stuff, some of it from the papers, and that article that NYE posted, which has some relevant stuff in it.

Since other than one excited guy on the video I haven't heard from a single individual. Oh and what are the two lies-- I know the "they were not police" one but whats the other?

That they were given rocks by protesters and told to throw them. Neither of these can be true, since they were rumbled as soon as they came into contact with the people they accused of doing this (that much seems clear from the reports). Technically, that counts as two additional lies, but let's give the filth a break.

For instance, if the supposed police lie is that they got the rock from the Blocker . .. that is arguably true even if the main group identified them as police. I never heard a chronology of whether it was obtained before, after or during the encounter with the first group. Its possible both groups are telling the truth since I have not heard anything that make those points mutually exclusive.

Now you're grasping. The cops made their way up the road towards the Black Bloc protest. Long before they got there, they came upon a group of Bloc at or around the gas station a fair way away from the gates, who outed them, and told them to eff off in French. They then made their way back around to the other side of the protest. The idea that the Black Bloc gave them rocks is preposterous, since the Black Bloc are the ones that immediately outed them as cops.

For now, I continue to keep an open mind until I have an opportunity to review this evidence that you indicate exists

Don't confuse an open mind with an empty head. All you are doing is mindless what-iffing. Anyone can do that: what if the cops were possessed by aliens? The video doesn't prove they weren't, so it's a possibility.

And don't think we don't know what a tory you are.

[Flubber]

Originally posted by Agathon




Now you're grasping. The cops made their way up the road towards the Black Bloc protest. Long before they got there, they came upon a group of Bloc at or around the gas station a fair way away from the gates, who outed them, and told them to eff off in French. They then made their way back around to the other side of the protest. The idea that the Black Bloc gave them rocks is preposterous, since the Black Bloc are the ones that immediately outed them as cops.

huh-- So the Black Bloc are in a unit with one mind-- they act with total unanimity and all know the same stuff?

If not, is it possible there might have been other Black Blockers around that they might have encountered before the main group? You are saying it is impossible that there would have been Black Blockers around other than in this unit of Blockers that apparently identified them on sight.

And who were the group near the old folks? Either they were the first group that identified the police on sight and came along with them ( in which case it would be silly to be supposedly asking them to do violence) or they were a separate group . Did the police say they got the rock from the first Black Blockers they met near the gas station? Could they have not been given a rock by some random Blocker somewhere between the two groups.

You talk as if the Blockers would be acting uniformly and under a unity of command that would be admirable. Even the regular military is unable to tell where all their members are so the fact that the Black Block is certain that no one dressed like them could have given out a rock-- astounding.


I know I know. IT was the RCMP undercovers that gave them out to the SQ undercovers


Do I believe the SQ on this point? NOt really but I cannot accept that they have been proven liars either on this point

[Flubber]

Originally posted by Agathon




Don't confuse an open mind with an empty head. All you are doing is mindless what-iffing. Anyone can do that: what if the cops were possessed by aliens? The video doesn't prove they weren't, so it's a possibility.

I am not going that far afield into alien world

1. Is it likely that some protesters had weapons on them? I assess it as highly likely .

2. Is it likely that a protester with a number of weapons like rocks might share them with other people he thought were protesters like him. I assess this as highly likley.

So to believe the police on the "given a rock" story, all you need to assume is that there was a Black Blocker somewhere near/at the protest that did not immediately identify these people as police.

That said, I don't think it matters much. the cops could have said they brought a couple of rocks or picked them up at the protest site.

[Flubber]

Originally posted by Agathon

And don't think we don't know what a tory you are.

Hmmm-- I have voted for all three major parties and support gay marriage, progressive taxation, a strong social safety net, stem cell research etc etc

Thats quite a tory agenda now isn't it

[General Ludd]

Number one way of outing a provocateur: If someone is talking about illegal behaviour that they have done, or plan on doing, or are encouraging other people to do (outside of a group of people who have complete trust for one another) than remind them not to talk about it so freely. If they continue, then consider them bad news.

EDIT: as an added bonus, this practice also helps protect people from said undercover cops.

Cops don't dress up just for protests, either. They can be found in organizational meetings and community scenes frequented by activists aswell.